JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is the President of the Managing Committee of the 4th respondent-Society, is aggrieved with the proceedings initiated under Section 66 of the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act, 1969 [for brevity “the Act”], as per Exhibit P9.

2. The petitioner has two contentions in challenge of Exhibit P9. The first contention is that Exhibit P9 relates to the very same issue that was asked to be explained by Exhibit P1 notice. The petitioner has filed detailed objections to Exhibit P1 and there could be no separate proceedings initiated, at Exhibit P9, under Section 66 without consideration of the explanation of the petitioner to the identical allegations in the earlier notice. It is also contended that Section 66 mandates satisfaction of the officer initiating an inspection under Section 66 and it cannot be on the dictate of the superior officer. There is no satisfaction of the Joint Registrar (General) evident from Exhibit P9 and the proceedings are purportedly issued only on the directions of the Registrar, evident from the communication dated 03.04.2013 referred to in Exhibit P9 as item No.(5). It is also contended that the allegations in Exhibits P1 and P9 are wit